Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
What Is Missing From Mathematics

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Alan on August 9, 2002 03:51:50 UTC

Quick comment for now:

It has been written that, re: mathematics; when you stop asking (re: numbers) questions like "ten what?" or "173 what?", you begin to fly. In abstract thinking? Or sink, in reality-thinking?

Specification is missing in math. Math is fuzzy; is generalisations.

Physics may well be that which is missing from mathematics! Physics: the laws that specify which generalisation you are talking about; from the perspective of a non-contradicting deal between other generalisations?

The bits they left out of mathematics: physics?

It appears that Dr. Dick has correctly described his equations 1.1 and 1.2 his way; specially in the last three paragraphs. I see 1.3 about to unravel itself. But my description of equations 1.1 and 1.2 still is accurately represented by these two equations.

On the face of it; he may seem to have used a radically different method to map those equations than I did.

Or was it so different? Hidden in Dr. Dick's method, is a subtle code. I suspect that code continues throughout his work. He seems possibly somewhat unaware of its presence.

This "code" is actually a little game, that I have described at length before.

I hope to be able to show how his system of reasoning has encoded in it the system I described.

The above is somewhat vague; subject to revision; but a hint at what discoveries may be round the corner.

Clue: adding "unknown data" to items is like "naming" the items. Adding it more than once; then removing a "name" without saying WHICH name (the first added name or the second added name) is playing musical chairs with the names. Anything described by such a process becomes a comparison of the names.

As "physics laws" are "laws of comparison"; building up a description of constraint from playing musical chairs with unknown data will give you "laws of comparison".

Note: Dr. Dick has given specific logical demonstration of Einstein's alleged mistake: theories derived from his geometry allegedly produce absurd (as in logically contradictory) result: time travel; and dubious results: tacheons.

(proper reply later)


Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2023 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins